Not sure why this got removed from 196lemmy…blahaj.zone but it would be real nice if moderation on Lemmy gave you some sort of notification of what you did wrong. Like an automatic DM or something

  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m going to use a technique that I frequently use when discussing philosophy, to cut through the smokescreen of bullshit. Ignore your preconceived definitions. They don’t matter. Instead of “cultural relativism”, whatever you think that is, we are going to discuss “what the general population thinks of when they hear the term ‘cultural relativism’”. For short, I am going to call this Skywalker Theory. No academic has ever written about Skywalker Theory. There are no papers to reference. There’s no books, no dissertations, no letters. Skywalker Theory exists solely in the minds of people who have never gone beyond Intro to Philosophy.

    Skywalker Theory says:

    • The idea of an objective “good” is impossible since different groups believe different things at different times. We believe in Good and Bad, but it’s really just the result of cultural conditioning.

    Any time your see “Cultural Relativism”, replace that with Skywalker Theory for the purposes of this discussion.

    Skywalker Theory is not fleshed out. It’s really just a premise. There’s a lot that is up for discussion. Skywalker Theory may resemble established academic philosophies like nihilism, but it is not nihilism. It doesn’t have the baggage of all the various discussions and terms and definitions and writings that the philosophy of nihilism has. You can say “nihilism says that [x]” and reference previous writings and scenarios and logical conclusions. You cannot say that about Skywalker Theory. There’s nothing to reference.

    • Poplar?@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not really sure what to reply with.

      “Skywalker theory” (so far identical to error theory) isnt what the post or the discussion is about. The meme is pretty clear it is about cultural relativism and clear about what it means by cultural relativism.

      If you want to bring your own objection to moral realism, sure, but it makes little sense hijacking the definition to mean something entirely different and being unhappy this wasnt what the term others were using meant.